I stopped arguing with you a long time ago.
I've given you all I can.
Good luck.
Last edited:
A God We Know Nothing About
- Thread starter PsychoticEpisode
- Start date
I stopped arguing with you a long time ago.
I've given you all I can.
Good luck.
you've piqued my curiosity
where to?
do you need to bring your own gardening equipment?
Maybe you'll be able to think straighter after taking a break from attempting to have a rational discussion with LG & Visitor.
PsychoticEpisode,
Because Jan, none of it is worthwhile unless the primary information is a known fact. So it might be pertinent to establish the primary as fact.
LOL.
Think about it. What can be established as the fact that God exists, which would make the entire population of the world know that God exists?
These are your conditions, which, to me is another way of saying "God does not exist".
You most probably think the theory of evolution is a fact, but can you, or anyone produce life from nought, in a lab? That would would prove the story as fact beyond doubt. Of course the answer is an astounding NO.
What?
I don't understand how the shit works?
Right back at you pal.
Speak for yourself, not for me.
jan.
Because Jan, none of it is worthwhile unless the primary information is a known fact. So it might be pertinent to establish the primary as fact.
LOL.
Think about it. What can be established as the fact that God exists, which would make the entire population of the world know that God exists?
These are your conditions, which, to me is another way of saying "God does not exist".
You most probably think the theory of evolution is a fact, but can you, or anyone produce life from nought, in a lab? That would would prove the story as fact beyond doubt. Of course the answer is an astounding NO.
What?
I don't understand how the shit works?
Right back at you pal.
Speak for yourself, not for me.
jan.
That is like saying that you want to know what a 'musical instrument' is, but you refuse to consider any traits by which you could recognize a 'musical instrument' upon seeing it.
IOW, what you want cannot be done, as the existence of phenomena is inseparable from their traits or qualities by which they can be recognized as existing.
I am quite sure Jan Ardena wakes up in the morning feeling that he lives a meaningful life, and goes to bed feeling that his day was a day well-spent.
Can you say the same about yourself?
Is it worth describing something to someone who has never experienced or sensed it? People do it and such a description may stimulate the imagination but I think that when the actual goods are presented, it doesn't resemble what the mind has pictured.
With God there is a bigger problem....there is nothing to describe. No clue, no old photograph, no recent demonstration , no nothing. Pure speculation and that's it. How can anyone justify describing a belief?
Let's take the musical instrument as an example. If I knew nothing of it then you would expect me to describe it? Come on, that is plain idiocy. I don't expect people to describe God to me when they know nothing about him. You can try but I could not for one minute believe a word about it and why should I?
More than 1O Jan Ardenas put together.
Psychoticepisode
what makes you say that?
The problem is that you only believe there are two ways of knowing – empiricism and speculation.
“I know that you don’t know ..... so even if you say you know I know you don’t” is a pretty good example of proactive interference
Describing things only within one’s experience doesn’t lend itself as a very effective pedagogical model.
really?
what makes you say that?
nothing empirical ... but then calling upon the senses to demonstrate something beyond the senses has the makings for a great tragi-comedy.
well you finally spat it out on the table
The problem is that you only believe there are two ways of knowing – empiricism and speculation.
“I know that you don’t know ..... so even if you say you know I know you don’t” is a pretty good example of proactive interference
I believe that believe is a bad choice of words should you want me to agree with that.
You believe there's a third? This is something I cannot know. Do you want me to describe it?
I ate the paper the place name was written on & not this time
well if you can answer correctly who is the president of the united states there is a good chance you are not using an empirical method ... unless you are his personal secretary or something
your methods of world travel are certainly uniqueI ate the paper the place name was written on & not this time
That isn't your problem, is it?
Obviously, some theists here find it worth to describe God to you.
Then why are you posting here, if you see no reason to believe what you are told?
How is it worthwhile to describe to someone something you know nothing about? Don't include what humans have told you and if you can, please tell us the worth of describing to me a god, without any knowledge of that god.
If you want to tell me what you believe then fine. If what you are telling me is unknowable & untestable then I would quickly discard it to the bottom of my list of things people say they believe in.
Unfortunately the test for God is a futile endeavor. I can't test to prove God doesn't exist, if that is my chosen belief. Knowing this I am satisfied with not giving it much more thought, and I am unencumbered by it in my daily regimen. I post this thread because I am in a discussion forum that encourages point/counterpoint rapport between its members. If I knew everyone agreed with me then this thread would never have happened.
Assuming as you are, that I've never met the man, then I could only believe he exists..... I suppose it is something along those lines you are referring to. IOW I am Scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz. But then again maybe you don't have a brain either LG.
Oh wait, maybe LG really isn't there. Not going to work for me I'm afraid but if you like it that way then I'll consider that one more of your beliefs.Your world view is tragically linear if you only have recourse to "belief" once you reach the (narrow) limits of empiricism.
Your world view is tragically linear if you only have recourse to "belief" once you reach the (narrow) limits of empiricism.
Belief is on the outer limit of the tragically linear. It's the hopelessly tragic linear. Like a river, midstream moves much quicker than the water at the river's edge.(Like that one?)
the tragedy lies in that you (apparently) don't have the means to distinguish between contemporary american politics and the works of Baum.
Strawman? Scarecrow?
you were looking for them on the ballot paper?
They were there.
In typical fashion the topic has been neatly pushed aside.
Please tell us what you know about God? Not believe about but truly know.
just so we can be absolutely clear about this, perhaps you can give an example of something that you "truly" know , completely divorced from issues of belief